Navigate:

December 20, 2009

Categories:

The Congressional Budget Office issued additional information and a correction of its cost estimates today that have Senate Republicans calling for Democrats to slow action on the health reform bill to give officials a chance to digest the data.

CBO director Doug Elmendorf said that in the second decade the legislation would not cut the deficit as much as originally predicted. On his blog, he wrote: "The correction reduces the degree to which the legislation would lower federal deficits in the decade after 2019."

A CBO staffer also sent an email to Republican and Democratic leadership and key committees saying that the Medicaid funding deals included in the bill for Nebraska, Vermont and Massachusetts would cost $1.2 billion over the next decade. Because each state's deal was structured differently, it is unclear how the $1.2 billion breaks down for each state.

A spokesman for Patrick Leahy said the senator's home state of Vermont expects to receive $250 million more in Medicaid funding over the course of the six-year deal, which Leahy engineered.

Yesterday, Democratic aides estimated that the Medicaid deal for Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson's home state of Nebraska, which ensures the federal government picks up the tab for any new Medicaid beneficiaries added to state rolls under the bill, would cost about $45 million over the first decade.

“CBO typically issues additional information, corrections, clarifications and revisions following any big analysis release. In fact, five days after Reid’s merger was released, CBO was still releasing additional information and clarifications," said a Republican Senate leadership aide. "It's another reason why Congress shouldn’t rush to jam this vote in the dead of night.”

The Democrats are scheduled to take their first vote on the health care bill at 1 a.m. Monday.

Update: Tonight, the CBO put out a memo of how the $1.2 billion breaks down. Over 10 years, $600 million would go to Vermont, $500 million to Massachusetts and $100 million to Nebraska. But Vermont's Medicaid deal is only for six years and Massachusetts gets three-years worth of additional funding. Only Nebraska gets the funding in perpetuity. So while Nebraska's amount looks the smallest, over time it could make Vermont's and Massachusetts funding look like a pittance.

Share this Article

Reader Comments (11)

Pages

1

"Yesterday, Democratic aides estimated that the Medicaid deal for Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson's home state of Nebraska, which ensures the federal government picks up the tab for any new Medicaid beneficiaries added to state rolls under the bill, would cost about $45 million over the first decade."
The federal government picks up the tab!...I love the spin...you mean, the American taxpayer picks up the tab. So, those of us who are already getting screwed to pay for the 12% that aren't insured are now going to get screwed further to pay for states who's representatives held out for sweetheart deals. I wish progressives would take their whiny selves to a place that suits them instead of forcing their agenda on the majority of Americans who don't want this health care overhaul!
Why not tort reform and open state lines for insurance coverage?!? It's great having big brother watching our every move (i.e. OUR medical history)...unbelievable.

Hmmmm....the same people who told us social security would be solvent, the same people who said medicaid and medicare would be solvent. But this time you believe them and "why?"
When has any government program ever not exceeded forecasts by a huge margin?
So why would we think this time it won't?
This time it's 1/6th of the economy they are going to risk. How many underfunded liabilities are their already for all the other failed programs? Answer: In the trillions for as fall as the eye can see.
We're ****ed!

HOLY COW! SOMEBODY CALL HANNITY AND BECK.. oh wait, all the CBO said was that the deficit will not be reduced as much.
Ok, carry on, complain about ACORN, socialism, Bill Ayres, Reverend Wright, birth certificate, granny's abortion being paid by public funding....

I remember when NAFTA was running at about 20% approval rate and the Repubs and Clinton jammed it through anyway. Both parties are taking the nation in the same direction. Ross Perot stayed in as a spoiler long enough to get Clinton elected and got himself a sweetheart deal as Alliance airport was then declared as a trade free zone.
We need a Third Party but not one taken over by either political party or the unions. UNLESS this happens our nation will be insolvent and our Constitution will be supplanted by GLOBAL TREATIES before 2020.
Just sayin.....

P19 CBO scoring of Manager's Amendment (Reid's "bill") states - paraphrased: It is unclear whethr such reduction in the growth rate (medicare spending) could be achieved...or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care. CBO STATEMENT on p19

Section 8.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be UNIFORM throughout the United States;